The DomInion. THURSDAY, MARCH 11, 1920. AN IMPRESSIVE REPORT

Dominion, Volume 13, Issue 142, 11 March 1920, Page 4

The Domlnion. THURSDAY, MARCH 11, 1920. AN IMPRESSIVE REPORT

Within the last few years new ideas have arisen in this country in regard to the right method of dealing with native forests. The establishment of a Department of Forestry makes it possible to hope that the wasteful and improvident devastation of timber-producing areas will be stopped, and that large areas of forest will be conserved and developed henceforth as a permanent source of national wealth, and as a means of reducing taxation, lowering the cost of living, and extending settlement widely and at little cost. The new appreciation of the great and lasting value of our native forests that is gaining ground is due very largely to tho untiring efforts of Sir David Hittchins, a forester of international reputation, who has been in New Zealand for the last three years, and in that period has given much time and thought to the preparation of a series of reports on the forests of the Dominion. An illustrated volume of two' hundred pages issued a day or two ago by the Department of Forestry embodies his general conclusions on various aspects of forest policy .and management in this country, as well as the results of a detailed examination of kauri and other forests in the North Island. This volume, some extracts from which were published in our news columns .yesterday, is an impressive statement of the wealth-producing possibilities of New Zealand forests, and one that obviously is entitled to the most thoughtful consideration. In details it no doubt leaves some questions open for discussion. It may be long enough before some of the opinions and conclusions submitted by Sin David _ Hutciiins are tested in local • working experience. But in broad essentials this comprehensive report leaves little enough scope for uncertainty or conjecture. No one who reads it can doubt that the choice in this country between forest conservation and the continuance of reckless and unmethodical destruction is tho choice between a dead loss and a clear gain. Neither is it in doubt that the loss oi gain, as the case may be, arc alike of impressive magnitude. ]t is impossible to challenge the dictum of a forester of the standing of Sm David Hutciiins that the forests of t,h» Dominion may be easily perpetuated and made immensely more productive than they arc to-day, and he affirms emphatically not only that this can be done, but that the cost of the work of restoration will be comparatively trifling, and in

many cases will bo much more than covered by timber royalties and other items of forest revenue.

Naturally the full results of a sound forest policy will not be attained in a day. Extensive areas which should have been given over to permanent cultivated forest are, and will be, unproductive so far as this generation is concerned. This is the present state of a very large part of the area of half a million acres of kauri forest which, according to Sir David Hutchins, will ultimately return a net revenue of more than £10 per acre per annum to the State. But great areas of valuable forest remain—in the northern half of the North Island, in Westland, and in some other parts of the South Island—and it is a matter of urgent practical importance to the people of the present day that the most should be made of these forests in maintaining timber supnliea and keeping the price of timber as low as possible, and in extending permanent settlement. If continued waste is tolerated, the people of this, as well as of future generations, will pay the penalty in an increased cost of living and in other ways. Sib David Hktoiiinr estimates that timber-bearing Crown and Native- lands are still being alienated at the rate of 30,000 acres a year without forest demarcation— that is to say, without any attempt being made to determine whether the land will pay better under forest than if devoted to the purposes of ordinary'settlement. Timber is already commanding scarcity prices in New Zealand, and it is plain enough that so long'as it continues to alienate forest lands without demarcation the Dominion is_ taking the shortest rout? tr condition? of chronic timber famine. From the standpoint of settlement the case for good forestry is equally strong. Groat areas are to-day barren, or affording poor returns;, which under forest would have sustained a thriving population in permanent and well-paid employment. There fi-rp of course, existing forests which will have to give way to farm settlement, but it is self-evident that Sin. David Hutchins is right in urging that not a remaining acre of bushland should be alienated until expert examination has determined whether it will pay _ best as, forest, or as farm, In claiming that flic forests themselves will. afford wide scope for permanent settlement, Sir David Hutchins is able to appeal to world-wide experience. Particular interest attaches to his suggestion that forest development would offer suitable employment to returned soldiers who favour an openair life, but are not qualified or inclined to take up farming. He points out, also, that light work in the forests or in forest nurseries would give disabled men ideal conditions in which to recover health and_ strength. Some of the Australian States have given a lead in employing ex-soldiers in forest work which this country ought to be rmvc than ready to follow. Setting aside debatable- issues, it may be said that Sir David Hutchins has made, out such a case for the methodical conservation and utilisation of our native forests as no Government henceforth will be able tr? ignore unless it is prepared to incur the reproach of deliberately squandering a national estate, which, once lest, can never be replaced. His report ought to do ft great deal to smooth the path of the recently-established Department of Forestry, and there is little doubt that it will mnrk a great turning point in thf history and treatment of Now Zealand forests.